Munich High End 2015

[manisandher]

Just a very quick post for now (too much to do)...

My 'Phasure system' as it stands is simply so far beyond 99% of what I heard at Munich that I think this whole 'hifi hobby' is a joke. A real joke.

There were two systems that sounded very interesting to me, one for €600K and the other for €300K. But the rest really were mediocre at best.

More to come when I have time (and I still haven't downloaded XX 2.0 yet!)...

Mani.

[PeterSt]

Hey Mani,

I almost started to be afraid to ask because it was a bit too silent and merely thought it all went the other way around ...
if you know what I mean.

So somehow ...
Yep.

Thank you,
Peter


PS: Did you meet Joachim or others ?

[christoffe]

PS: Did you meet Joachim or others ?

Hi Peter,

no, I was there on the worst day, Friday.
It was totally overcrowded and the chances for serious listening was zero.
Most rooms (I visited) had the typical "exhibition sound" (of an empty hall), and the brands with (prior) overwhelming reviews did not stand my expectations.

Joachim

[PeterSt]

Ah Joachim, that is sad !

Well, then enjoy *this* weekend !

Peter

[music33]

Mani,
You called the whole hifi hobby a real joke - Care to expound a bit...
Don't feel like you need to 'hold back', lol.

Cheers,
Dave

[manisandher]

Hi Dave, I dunno... it just seems that so many people at the show (manufacturers, retailers and consumers) were delusional. Systems costing as much as a nice house and sounding very 3rd rate (compared to my own, or the very best I heard at the show). And I walked into some rooms with the guys in charge ranting and raving about the sound they were getting, which to my ears wasn't far off nails scr*ping against a blackboard.

My 'almost totally Phasure system' cost me less around €30k I guess - not cheap for sure, but still, sounding a quantum leap better than some systems costing over 20 times as much at the show.

And I now totally agree with Peter about vinyl. All the systems I heard that had a vinyl front end sounded totally flat and lifeless to me. All of them. If some of the €600k+ systems that used a vinyl front end were to have replaced that with a NOS1a, then perhaps they might have sounded half-decent... I dunno. But as it was, they were terrible without exception.

And why do I say that this whole hifi hobby is a joke? Well because 99% of 'high-end' manufacturers must really have a good laugh whenever anyone buys their stuff. What they sell is cr*p, and surely they must know this. Their hearing can't be that bad. But their stuff looks good, weighs a lot, costs a lot, and of course, is well marketed to the thousands of mindless 'sheep' in this hobby... sheep who will follow pretty much every new reviewer-revealed 'game-changer' with salivating mouths.

And this is why I find Peter such a breath of fresh air in this hobby. I am absolutely certain now that the 'Phasure way' is the best way... the results simply speak for themselves. If any newbie to this hobby were to come to me, I'd advise them to build a decent PC, then buy XX, then a Clarixa, then a Blaxius, then a NOS1a, and finally a pair of Orelo/Orelino speakers... in that order and up to how much they can afford. I'm pretty certain this would give them absolutely the best bang for their buck.

It seems to me that authenticity is in very short measure in this hobby of ours. Those who frequent this site should count themselves as very lucky.

Mani.

[xp9433]

Mani

I know you are reporting to this special audience, but you are a little too tough on other audio manufacturers. Setting up for good sound in "show" conditions is a nightmare. Ask Peter about his last effort. So I would politely like to soften your comments.

Consider how long it took you to fine tune your system at home to get the sound you are now getting. It wasn't always as great as it is now. And you needed DSP/EQ to help achieve that - this is rarely an option at shows, and an exhibitor doesn't have time to optimise.

As for manufacturers, you are much too tough. Most are striving hard to produce the very best they can, and as you can testify, if they compare under show conditions, they probably think they are doing well!

Then there is the pricing issue of trying to compare selling direct, like Phasure, to selling through distributors and retailers. Huge price difference. Peter's designs are therefore exceptional value in every way.

Mani, I am not saying that Peter's system isn't fantastic and perhaps world-leading, I would love to own it, just that it is not necessarily valid to compare Show-SQ with a properly set up Home-rig-SQ.

Finally, how few people (let alone manufacturers) have ever heard a system like yours and can make any kind of valid comparison with more regularly available and identifiable hi-end brands also in a carefully optimised set-up?

Cheers
Frank

[manisandher]

Hey Frank, thanks for your thoughts. A few comments from my side...

Consider how long it took you to fine tune your system at home to get the sound you are now getting. It wasn't always as great as it is now. And you needed DSP/EQ to help achieve that...

True. There was something very specific that I was always unhappy about with my system and yes it took a long while to sort out. BUT... overall, my system always sounded 'good'. I mean, the potential of the system was obvious from the start and never in doubt. I can't say the same for most of the systems I heard in Munich.

As for manufacturers, you are much too tough. Most are striving hard to produce the very best they can...

I'm sure some are. But I'm convinced the majority in 'high-end' totally understand that the priority is in selling 'jewellery' and 'brand' before 'sound quality'.

Then there is the pricing issue of trying to compare selling direct, like Phasure, to selling through distributors and retailers.

Well, I have way more disdain for distributors and retailers than I have for manufacturers. How many times has a distributor switched his opinion on a brand from being 'the best thing ever' to 'only mediocre after all' as soon as he happens to stop carrying it? I've read countless examples of this in the past.

I am not saying that Peter's system isn't fantastic and perhaps world-leading, I would love to own it, just that it is not necessarily valid to compare Show-SQ with a properly set up Home-rig-SQ.

A couple of systems at the show sounded very interesting to me. When I was a Munich I was using these systems as the reference.

Finally, how few people (let alone manufacturers) have ever heard a system like yours and can make any kind of valid comparison with more regularly available and identifiable hi-end brands also in a carefully optimised set-up?

Difficult, I know. So why not do what Peter does and use real instruments (a drum kit for example) as the reference with which to compare?

Interested in hearing yours or any other thoughts.

Mani.

[PeterSt]

Hi guys,

I read this this morning (before Mani's last response) and thought it was a most intrigueing post from Frank, with the post from Mani ahead of it. The combination of the both made me think that they are amongst the best in this forum.

Point is : this is one with the real experience against the other with also real experience but from a slightly other angle : the shows.
That is, Frank, I can expect you to have some experience with this, am I right ?

Anyway it is so true what Frank said, like "ask Peter about shows and how they can fail". So so true.
And how you can't do a thing about it.
Additionally it is also true that it may take a month to get things right in a "new room", if it can be done at all (without tearing down the building and all).

It also would be true that no other systems might exist that sound so truthful to the real music, but this is super dangerous to state because I say that from my own personal experience with my own ears which may suffer some crazy offset and it can well be that I like the music to be in a certain direction for technical accuracy which is a bit strange. Still, when I hear something in e.g. a specialised audio shop with very satisfied salesmen behind the controls, it is so far off that something ain't right. Similar like my "reporting" about the vinyl stuff and exactly nobody complaining while I only was full with the "OMG"'s from misery. So that *has* to say something.
It tells me that no matter when those show hotel rooms are finally OK, the music springing from the (high priced) systems still will not be. Just as my system sounds awful in such a room. But it is about the consensus one can perceive from others, like everybody being super happy and foot tapping while you are not at all with hurting ears. It is statictics.

If all is right (although I doubt it) then there's an x-Fi show again this year September. We are there and we are there in the same room (110) as the 2012 one. So it can't be that things fail because of the room, because that room was very OK.

Peter

[vrao]

Very interesting thread indeed!!

I completely agree with Mani. Hi-end has lost its focus, or may be never had it.

Few comments:

1) consumers with a lot of money, and no clue about sound. Focus switched from a balance of sound/technology to just equipment only (audio jewelry).

2) many boutique manufacturers serving just the above purpose, with bling, but poorly designed (sound) products.

3) focus on the high end industry for consumers to experiment with different equipment (continued sales), while keeping them dark about equipment matching. Or maybe clueless themselves ...

Why would manufacturers mix match components at shows that they themselves have not extended experience with?!

Just goes to show total system distortion is not under consideration by most manufacturers

4) while Amps, preamps, DACs have reached maturity, I solely blame the speaker manufacturers for poor products, without significant progress in the last few decades. Tweeters which are distorting at even normal playback levels. Bass distortion not even in consideration.

5) the "whole" system approach is not even considered by most manufacturers. Even if they are, it's just for the flavor of the month.

6) in that fashion, Peter's approach is most unique. Also his ears.

7) while the rooms are really the most important factor. I've hear the Phasure system (DAC) sound really poor and quite decent in different rooms, with different speakers, but the poor sound was related to the speaker.

8 ) no matter how bad a room sounds, one can at least get a hint of a systems potential, and as Mani mentions, these guys are on a different orbit.

9) I've auditioned in well set up dealer rooms, and have found, even the touted best, just unsatisfactory! Ofcourse I've not heard it "all".

Well I will be attending THE show at Newport Beach this weekend, just because ... 
I like to reset my baseline very frequently. Where does the joke start?

Best,
VJ

[Jud]

Great discussion as usual.

Interesting that I've found myself a little discouraged reading through forums other than this one as it seems there is an awful lot of the same old things:

The same fruitless old arguments with both sides being wrong and no one interested in learning or explaining anything.

When good new information is available, failure to pay attention and consequent misinterpretation and confusion everywhere.  (Two examples: the thousandth person saying the Uptone Audio Regen is all about isolation, in spite of Alex, John, and others patiently explaining otherwise 999 times; George (exa) patiently explaining why defeating the grounding provisions for his DAC is a bad idea and showing the noise measurements to prove it after he was taken to task for bad design(!), then another commenter happily saying he was using a linear power supply with the DAC in the exact way George had explained not to, and saying hey, it sounded pretty good to him.) 

People saying DACs or cables or both do or don't sound different to them, using the same old language that explains nothing (more detailed versus more musical).

So no wonder the stuff sounds this way when they are marketing to people who don't make an effort to understand how things work and don't know what to listen for.  (No, Peter, your ears don't suffer some "crazy offset," or if they do it is the same as mine, Mani's, etc.: we like to get as close as we can to reality.  As I like to say, no one ever left a live concert raving about how "detailed" or "musical" the music was, so why should these be the things one listens for in a system if reality is the goal?)

I'd be curious about what you liked in Munich, Mani, if you are willing to say (if not, of course I will understand).

Speaking of future shows: I don't suppose there is any chance Phasure would go through the trouble to show at RMAF this October, is there?  Because I'll be there.  (My "price" for spending the second straight vacation with my wife getting things planned for our retirement home, which we'll be building in New Mexico in a year or two if all goes well.)

[PeterSt]

(Two examples: the thousandth person saying [...]

But that is just the Internet. Agreed, there too these things should not happen but we all know how difficult it is to bring some sense in (fast) writing and understanding each other well. But it is worse :

I wrote about the situation of The Turtle Records recording engineer telling me that no upright bass can sound good through loudspeakers because it can't be recorded well, after I told him that the lot sounded like sh*t in their demo room and their own recordings sounding super in my own listening room.
Btw, CC was there too and had no complaints. Nobody had except for one person who agreed with me and who bought a NOS1 out of my trunk on the spot.

I wrote about the KOJ small happening and that, for example, no filtering could be improved upon anyway. Discussion finished before it even could start.
Btw he was in a row with 7 others and they all did not seem to understand what good SQ is about. Strange.

I wrote about the last endeavour with Mr Van den Hul. Same thing : His cables are the best and he is the physicist so no need to discuss anything because I only write a bit of software and such. So sensible talk possible.

I am not *that* experienced with such people (in the end of name and fame I'd say) but if they are all like that then for sure nothing will improve ever. Or let's say that then it is no wonder that "their's" start to hurt your ears. But what is more worrying is that not even the start of a constructive conversation is possible.
Maybe audio snobs are ... just that ?

Peter

[christoffe]

Maybe audio snobs are ... just that ?

Peter

Hi Peter,

these guys are all swimming in the same pool with the audio press, which is dependent on their (audio manuf.) advertising.

When your products are highlighted for more than 20 years (and not criticized by anybody) ................ they are reacting as narcissists.

I read two/three critical comments about presentations in MUC only:
A)   http://www.monoandstereo.com/2015/05/munich-high-end-audio-2015-show.html (see the comments about Magico and Devialet)
B)   http://wizard-highend.blogspot.fi/
C)   http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/munich2015/6.html (see Magico)

Joachim

[acg]

Great discussion as usual.

Interesting that I've found myself a little discouraged reading through forums other than this one as it seems there is an awful lot of the same old things:

The same fruitless old arguments with both sides being wrong and no one interested in learning or explaining anything.

When good new information is available, failure to pay attention and consequent misinterpretation and confusion everywhere.  (Two examples: the thousandth person saying the Uptone Audio Regen is all about isolation, in spite of Alex, John, and others patiently explaining otherwise 999 times; George (exa) patiently explaining why defeating the grounding provisions for his DAC is a bad idea and showing the noise measurements to prove it after he was taken to task for bad design(!), then another commenter happily saying he was using a linear power supply with the DAC in the exact way George had explained not to, and saying hey, it sounded pretty good to him.) 

People saying DACs or cables or both do or don't sound different to them, using the same old language that explains nothing (more detailed versus more musical).

So no wonder the stuff sounds this way when they are marketing to people who don't make an effort to understand how things work and don't know what to listen for.  (No, Peter, your ears don't suffer some "crazy offset," or if they do it is the same as mine, Mani's, etc.: we like to get as close as we can to reality.  As I like to say, no one ever left a live concert raving about how "detailed" or "musical" the music was, so why should these be the things one listens for in a system if reality is the goal?)

I occasionally drop in over there then I have nothing else to do...read some thread headlines...feel pretty sure I know what they will contain...and then go do something else.  Same ole same ole.

Part of what is holding people back from getting a great system instead of just a good one is because most of us are unwilling to learn all that it takes to do it, and are content to randomly sample gear or ideas or dogma until something clicks.  Guys like Peter that know enough to put together a high performing "system" and make it available as a turn-key unit are relatively few and far between.

[acg]

A couple of systems at the show sounded very interesting to me. When I was a Munich I was using these systems as the reference.

I also would be interested in your opinions here Mani.